Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) was a smoker from 1897 - 1924, and had typical smoker symptoms. To refute that fact, a recently-invented myth is being circulated by tobacco apologists that he was a non-smoker! Over a half century after his death, this myth has been invented by people with an axe to grind. They hope that the truth has been forgotten, they hope people will buy into their disinformation.

People at the time, however, knew better. For example his teachers and colleagues knew better.

Hitler was born in the 19th century, in 1889.

At that time, in that 19th century era, it was notorious, widely known, that Germans believed in the libertarian so-called right to smoke (aka "right" to spew toxic substances), indeed, Germany was "the very land of smokers!" See

William A. Alcott, M.D., The Use of Tobacco: Its Physical, Intellectual, and Moral Effects on The Human System
(New York: Fowler and Wells, 1836), pp 16-17,

These references show that the fact of German-smoking-prevalence was common knowledge in America at the time.

"There was . . . nothing unique about Hitler."—Prof. W. Hugh Thomas, M.D. The Murder of Adolf Hitler: The Truth About the Bodies in the Berlin Bunker (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995), p 272. He was a typical smoker.

When Adolf was a boy age eight, about 1897, the same year Iowa and Tennessee were banning cigarettes, little Adolf was in school in Lambeck. And because Germans libertarian-style, believed in the so-called "right" to smoke, tobacco was widespread, little Adolf saw adults smoke, setting a bad example. He unfortunately followed their example, himself became a smoker. Yes, little Adolf was smoking. Smoking at age 8! In school even! This is a matter of public record! The little boy was being allowed to smoke despite the then near 300 years of knowledge of tobacco's role in brain damage! and other adverse effects. Pushers were then notoriously
targeting children. Tobacco company libertarian intent/action when unrestrained by law is shown by this pre-restraint example of smoking: 30% of 6 year old boys; 50% of "boys between 9 and 10"; 88% of boys over 11. Source: Dixon, On Tobacco, 17 Canadian Med Ass'n J 1531 (Dec 1927). "'They got lips? We want 'em,'" say the pushers, as recorded by Philip J. Hilts, in Smoke Screen: The Truth Behind The Tobacco Industry Cover-Up (NY: Addison-Wesley Pub Co, 1996), on the book jacket.

The nation's public and the government -- in their libertarian obsession for the so-called "right" to
smoke -- were ignoring the medical knowledge including tobacco's brain-damaging and criminal-producing capability -- were ignoring the urgent necessity to ban tobacco.

So let's look at facts. How do we know that little Adolf smoked? smoked in school? Answer: educated people opposed smoking. And they didn't want children smoking in school.

And so little Adolf was caught smoking. So he was expelled, "dismissed . . . because he was caught smoking in the gardens." Source: Dr. Walter C. Langer, The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime Report, Part IV, As He Knows Himself (OSS, 1944; reprinted, New York: New American Library, 1972). An expulsion is a matter of public record!

Public record, data from before the myth, that's how we know Hitler was a smoker, and had been started young.

We also know tobacco company pattern of behavior, their intent and selling practices, prior to the era of being restrained by law. Note this pre-restraint example of smoking: 30% of 6 year old boys; 50% of "boys between 9 and 10"; 88% of boys over 11. Source: Dixon, On Tobacco, 17 Canadian Med Ass'n J 1531 (Dec 1927).

To tobacco pushers, Hitler was just another little boy target for their homicidal mania. The article, "Volunteer Vice Squad," in Time magazine, 23 April 1990, by Janice Castro, depicts targeting policy, e.g., "The executives in the television commercial are grim. 'We need more smokers!' growls the tough-talking boss of a tobacco firm. 'Every day 2,000 Americans stop smoking. And another 1,100 also quit. Actually, technically, they die. That means that this business needs 3,000 fresh new volunteers every day. So forget about all of that cancer, heart. . . .'" For more background on pushers murderously targeting children, click here.

As was then known to occur disproportionately among smokers, little boy Adolf's mental ability deteriorated. As a result, his school grades went down. They went down to the extreme that in 1900, at another school, he failed and had to repeat a grade. Again, public record!

Little Hitler had a "poor scholastic record." "He failed to take the final examinations and never received a diploma." "Years later one his teachers described him as lacking self-discipline, 'being notoriously cantankerous, willful, arrogant, and bad-tempered,'" says Prof. Lucy S. Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945 (New York: Holt, Rinheart and Winston, 1975), p 6.

Hitler read already existing anti-semitic and pro-Aryan literature including "a series of pamphlets called Ostara: Briefbücherei der blonden Mannesrechtler ('Newsletters of the Blond Champions of Man's Rights')" by "Lanz von Liebenfels, an eccentric occultist-racist." "Ostara was available at many newstands, and Hitler had picked up a copy at the corner tobacconist's and then began to buy it regularly," says Prof. Lucy S. Dawidowicz, The War Against the Jews, 1933-1945 (New York: Holt, Rinheart and Winston, 1975), p 9.

Hitler and accomplices had a daily practice recorded in the period 11 Nov 1923 - 20 Dec 1924; they "would smoke and gossip . . .," says John Toland, Adolf Hitler (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co, 1976), p 203. Smoking from 1897 through at least 1924 made Hitler a smoker for at least about 27 years.

After Hitler's death, "in the bunker in Berlin in April 1945, as soon as his body had been burnt, his staff began smoking at work . . . had they consistently carried cigarettes to the 'Office'?" asks Henry Hobhouse, in Seeds of Wealth (Washington, DC: Shoemaker & Hoard, 2003), p 232. The movie "Downfall" (based on Joachim Fest's Inside Hitler's Bunker, etc.) likewise depicts the incessant smoking among Hitler's entourage. Hitler was evidently like former U.S. Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC), long-time smoker, whose concern about smoking was limited after his heart surgery to protecting himself, and without concern for meaningful action to protect people and the public generally.

Hitler's so-called anti-cigarette actions were quite limited, e.g., he merely "banned smoking by uniformed police, SA and SS men in public, even when off-duty." And he merely approved "severe restrictions [not a ban] on the advertising of cigarettes," Hobhouse, supra, p 232. Germany continues even through the year 2006 to oppose banning such ads. See Germany's lawsuit to stop the European Union from establishing such as ban: Germany v Parliament and Council (Case C-380/03, 12 December 2006). Germany lost, the court upheld banning most forms of cigarette advertising.

Germany in 2006 has the most pro-tobacco smoking regulations in Europe and one of the highest rates of tobacco use, with about one-third of adults being smokers, says the article "Germany may adopt stiffer smoking law" (Washington Times, 2 Dec 2006). Even its so-called 'progress' is essentially a farce:
(1) no meaningful controls on smoking in workplaces
(2) no smoke-free restaurants, instead allowing smoking rooms, which do not restrict the smoke unless they

The Nazi swastika flag colors, red and black, typically appeal to the brain-damaged. And Hitler used "odd stereotyped gestures" (hand motions up near his own face, to make a point) in his speeches. And "odd stereotyped gestures" are typical in brain damage. "Marked distortions of normal behavior appear in the form of odd stereotyped gestures," say Allen D. Calvin, Ph.D., et al, in their textbook on Psychology (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1961), p. 430.

Once in office, Hitler followed standard politician tactics. He followed the polls, German public opinion. He would change approach accordingly, as per public opinion data. See Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (New York: Harper & Row Perennial Library, 1987), p 486. Hitler carefully prioritized, was responsive to international opinion, and tailored approaches accordingly.

Hitler carefully followed precedents. For example, in the February 1933 - September 1935 period, Hitler "adopted the methods used against the Jews in fourteenth- and fifteenth-century Spain." Later, starting in September 1935, he switched approach, in "a reversion to the medieval system at its worst . . . a return to the odious but familiar past," says Paul Johnson, p 484. Hitler used that approach through Autumn 1938, then temporarily changed approach again, pursuant to changing German and international circumstances, p 485.

In November 1938, when the new approach proved "unpopular, not merely abroad but . . . in Germany . . . he changed his tactics," says Paul Johnson, p 486. And so on, until the World War beginning in September 1939. The November 1938 - September 1939 policy involved a Hitler-hands-off approach. Instead, in "legal measures against the Jews . . . the process was made highly bureaucratic. Every move was carefully thought out beforehand by experienced officials, not party theorists, and was made legal and systematic . . ." Via standard politician bureaucracy, "almost every department of the German government, and large numbers of civilians, were involved," Paul Johnson, p 486. For a dramatization, see, e.g., the documentary "Conspiracy" (HBO) on the 20 January 1942 Wannsee Conference.

the study by Prof. Robert Gellately, Backing Hitler: Consent and Coercion in Nazi Germany, 1933-1944 (Oxford University Press, 2001), “There were relatively few secret police, and most were just processing the information coming in. I had found a shocking fact. It wasn’t the secret police who were doing this wide-scale surveillance and hiding on every street corner. It was the ordinary German people who were informing on their neighbors.“
“They [Nazi officials] began with small violations of the rights of Jews and other minorities, and then ratcheted up their racism and persecution only when they saw implied consent from the German people.”

Pvt. Willy Peter Reese, A Stranger to Myself: The Inhumanity of War: Russia 1941-1944, transl. by Michael Hofmann, ed. Stefan Schmitz, foreword by Max Hastings (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005) ("Today it is an obvious and largely uncontroversial fact that what the Wehrmacht conducted in the East was an unexampled war of devastation. . . . The data about the German rampage in the Soviet Union defy the imagination: some 27 million dead. More than 3 million prisoners of war lost their lives, more than half of those the Wehrmacht held in their power. . . In the territories of Eastern Europe that were under the control of the German armies, Nazi executioners did away with millions of Jews," p xxi.)

For more background on the Nazi aggression into Russia and how it ultimately turned out, see, e.g.,

Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., “World War II: The Unknown War” (10 June 2014) (cites “the fact, well known to historians and educated people, that the Red Army defeated Nazi Germany long before the US was able to get geared up to participate in the war." Also cites the 20-part TV series “The Unknown War: WWII and the Epic Battles of the Russian Front” (1978) “narrated by Burt Lancaster" -- “a revelation to Americans because it demonstrated beyond all doubt that Nazi Germany lost World War II on the Russian front.”

Hitler was a practicing politician. He entered office due to large numbers of members of his party being elected as per the democratic process specified by the German Constitution.

Contrary to the myth of 'dictatorship,' the opposite was the case. Hitler did what the German people wanted done. Remember, as a high official, he never acted directly, never harmed a single person himself. All of the acts, atrocities, all, that you have heard of were by other people, regular Germans, volunteers, ordinary Germans. Ordinary Germans en masse wanted the so-called “Jewish problem” “solved,” wanted Jews killed.

“The Gestapo and its informers pursued people who expressed their divergence from Nazi antisemitism with a zeal that has led the foremost expert on the Gestapo to conclude that all such cases were reported and investigated. Yet in all of Lower Franconia, a region with 840,663 people (in 1939)—a region in which, as in all regions of Germany, Germans expressed an enormous amount of dissent on a wide range of Nazi policies, including on the treatment of foreigners—during twelve years of Nazi rule, only fifty-two such cases, four per year, came to the attention of the Gestapo! In the still much larger jurisdiction of Munich between 1935 and 1944, only seventy people were tried for remarks critical of the eliminationist project. The number of [such] remarks was so small as to have been 'almost insignificant',” says Prof. Daniel J. Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996), pp 429-430, referencing Robert Gellately, The Gestapo and German Society: Enforcing Racial Policy, 1933-1945 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990), pp. 205-206, 58.
At p 591, Prof. Goldhagen notes concerning the above-cited critical remarks: “Even among this paltry number of critical remarks, some [German dissenters] did not contest the prevalent conception of Jews or the justice of the eliminationist program, but instead questioned the wisdom of the measures given the speakers' expectations that the Jews would take revenge on Germany (see [Gellately] pp. 208-209).” And: “Almost half of the Munich cases were dropped, so flimsy must they have been (p. 206).”
From p. 121: "Anxiety over the revenge that Germans, in their antisemitic stupor, fanstasized that the Jews would exact upon them [Germans] for the persecution also made some [Germans] ambivalent about their country's eliminationist assault on the Jews.
This was expressedly repeatedly during the 1930s and then after the war began, especially with regard to the [Allied] bombing of Germany. So in November 1943, the president of the State Supreme Court in Braunschweig reported that there were many people who blamed the Nazi Party for the terror bombing, which it had caused by its treatment of the Jews. The fear of reprisals from the all-powerful Jews, even in the 1930s, and the destruction of Germany that Germans believed the Jews to be causing with the war, were of sufficient magnitude to prompt even dedicated antisemites to reconsider the wisdom of the national assault on the Jews. Their attribution of responsibility for the leveling of German cities to the objectively impotent Jews is, by itself, proof positive of their adherence to a Nazified view of Jews."

Ordinary Germans had a rampant blaming-others attitude, citing others' alleged flaws but never seeing their own, citing what others had done, but never what they had done:

“The reader will have to get used to the German habit of blaming other countries for getting themselves invaded by Germans. . . . [Germans] apparently lost the power to think in other [more rational] terms.”—HermanWouk, The Winds of War (Boston: Little, Brown & Co, 1971), p 111.
Observe that that German attitude “starts . . . exactly as Adolf Hitler started all his speeches, by denouncing the Versailles Treaty as an injustice imposed on 103an honorable and trusting Germany by the cruel Allies. He [the German] does not mention the historical catch to that. German writers seldom do. In 1917 Lenin [with German help] overthrew the Kerensky government and [then himself under German attack] sued for a separate peace on the eastern front. The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, dictated by the Germans [to prostrate Russia] over a year before the Treaty of Versailles, deprived Russia of a territory much larger than France and England combined, of almost sixty million inhabitants, and of almost all her heavy industry. It [the German-dictated treaty] was far harsher than the Versaillies Treaty.
“I used to bring up this little fact . . . whenever Versailles was mentioned. My German friends were invariably puzzled by the comparison. They thought it [that context, their own savage harsh treaty-writing behavior against a defeated nation] made no sense at all. The treaty of Versailles had happened to them; Brest-Litovsk had happened to the other fellow. In this reaction they were sincere. I cannot explain this national quirk of the Germans but it should never be forgotten . . . .,” pp 102-103.

It is pure myth to claim HITLER somehow oppressed the German people! He was chosen by the democratic process! to do as politicians typically do, FOLLOW, REPRESENT, the will of the people! That's what Hitler did. There was nothing magical about it! Thus, “the German population was indeed guilty of a great measure of complicity in the murder of the Jews and in many other crimes committed in Nazi society,” says Eric A. Johnson, Nazi Terror: The Gestapo, Jews, and Ordinary Germans (New York: Perseus Basic Books, 1999), p 362.

Few objected, e.g., Lt. Kurt Gerstein as shown in the documentary "Amen" (Costa-Gavras, 2002), but ineffectively. No doubt, because even though Lt. Gerstein opposed the genocide, he was still an anti-Semite, and because of his Lutheran religion's historic and then on-going teachings. When Lt. Gerstein goes to his Lutheran pastor, the latter says that the majority of the population agrees with Hitler. Lt. Gerstein admits that he favored banishing the Jews. Note that as Holocaust historian Raul Hilberg in The Destruction of the European Jews (1961), notes, "Christians" have deployed three strategies against Jews over the centuries: forced conversion, exile, and extermination. The Catholic and Lutheran Churches may not have created the death camps, but they beyond all doubt contributed to the ethos that made them possible. This blatant fact about "Christians" undermines their credibility and their ever taking the high moral ground on any subject with anyone after that Holocaust, not to mention their prior holocausts against Indians and blacks and the on-going holocaust against tobacco users.

See also Randall Hansen, Disobeying Hitler: German Resistance After Valkyrie (Oxford University Press, 1 July 2014), summarzed as follows: "On July 20, 1944, Colonel Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg was executed in the courtyard of the Third Reich's military headquarters in Berlin for attempting to assassinate Adolf Hitler. A member of the unsuccessful plot to overthrow the Nazi government -- codenamed Operation Valkyrie -- Stauffenberg was shot by a firing squad along with his co-conspirators, and their bodies were dumped in a shallow grave. Most discussions of German resistance during World War II end here, with the failed July 20 plot and the subsequent execution of its leaders. And yet this was far from the last act of disobedience carried out against the Nazi regime, as Randall Hansen reveals in his fascinating new book. Although "resistance" as a commitment to regime change all but ended with Stauffenberg, Hansen shows that if we consider resistance as disobedience -- of orders to detonate a bridge, to wreck a factory, to destroy a harbor or to defend a city to the last man -- then a very different picture emerges. Resistance-as-disobedience continued, and indeed increased, throughout late 1944 and early 1945. And it had a more profound and lasting material effect on the war and its aftermath than did the military resistance culminating in Stauffenberg's attempt on Hitler's life. From the refusal to destroy Paris and key locations in southern France to the unwillingness to implement a scorched earth policy on German soil, disobedience in the Third Reich manifested in numerous ways after 1944, and ultimately impacted the course of the war by saving thousands of Allied and German lives, keeping supply lines open, and preserving cities and infrastructure. In a period of thorough and at times fanatical obedience, the few instances of disobedience against the Nazi regime become all the more striking. Considering various forms of oppostion across the Western Front, Disobeying Hitler is a significant contribution to the literature on German resistance."

Wherefore, refuting the myth of “Nazi terror,” the reality is: “the Nazis did not rule by terror and terror rarely touched the lives of most ordinary Germans.”—Eric A. Johnson, supra, frontispiece. Of course, because Hitler, as a typical politician, was doing their bidding. German voters had, in large numbers, voted for the politicians who had in turn, representing widespread German views, adopted the laws enabling the genocide and crimes!

In fact, in contrast to some, Hitler and the Nazi leadership were a restraining influence! especially with respect to judges! much more vicious than him!

“Judges and [lawyers] were so eager to purge the institutions and the country of Jewish influence that they, beginning already in the first few months of Nazi governance, often outran the legal mandates that the regime promulgated. In October 1933, one Berlin court upheld the dismissal of a Jew from administering an estate, ruling that the people's pervasive hatred of Jews 'made it seem inadvisable to retain a Jew in office, even in the absence of a special law to this effect.' Earlier that year, in July, another Berlin court provided a more sweeping justification for judges taking such initiative in the battle against Jewry. According to Die Juristische Wochenschrift, the most important German legal periodical, the court, writing with obvious approval, pointed out 'that a revolutionary legislature [the Nazis had been in office but six months] naturally leaves loopholes which ought to be filled by the Court in applying the principles of the National Socialist Weltanschauung. The German judiciary--almost all of whom had taken the bench during Weimar and therefore were not, at least formally, not 'Nazi judges'--was composed of such ardent racial antisemites that leading Nazis (bound to the belief that the eliminationist program should be legally governed) chastised judges for having violated the law in their rampant eliminationist ardor.
Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick similarly tried to rein in all those under his jurisdiction, including many holdovers from Weimar, from extending the eliminationist measures beyond the laws that the regime had made. The judiciary's extensive contribution
to the persecution of the Jews during the Nazi period reveals its members to have been zealous implementers and initiators of eliminationist measures. The judges composed a group that was obviously bristling with anti-Jewish hatred during Weimar, and then, when Hitler took power, was [felt] freed to act upon these beliefs.” See Prof. Daniel J. Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996), p 97.
(Excerpt).

Their intent was that “old industrial evils, thought to have passed permanently into history, re-emerged as the conditions of labor deteriorated precipitously,” p 6, e.g., “unions and strikes were outlawed. Union property and farm cooperatives were confiscated and handed over to rich private owners. Minimum-wage laws, overtime pay, and factory safety regulations were abolished,” p 6.

“Speedups became commonplace. Dismissals or imprisonment awaited those workers who complained about unsafe or inhumane work conditions,” p 7. “Workers toiled longer hours for less pay. The already modest wages were severely cut, in Germany by 25 to 40 percent,” p 7. And “taxes were increased for the general populace but lowered or eliminated for the rich and big business. Inheritance taxes on the wealthy were greatly reduced or abolished altogether,” p 7. “The result of all this? . . . overall poverty increased because of the drastic wage cuts [but for the rich] from 1935-1943 industrial profits increased substantially while the net income of corporate leaders climbed 46 percent,” p 7.

With respect to “share of the national income . . . in Germany the top 5 percent enjoyed a 15 percent gain," p 8. Thus 'fascism [is] a dictatorial force in the service of capitalism . . . an important part of fascism's raison d'être, the function Hitler himself kept referring to when he talked about saving the industrialists and bankers,” p 8.

“The greatest source of Hitler's wealth was a secret slush fund to which leading German industrialists regularly donated. Hitler 'knew that as long as German industry was making money, his private money sources would be inexhaustible. Thus, he'd see to it that German industry was never better off than under his rule—by launching, for one thing, gigantic armament contracts,' or what we today would call fat defense contracts,” p 9, and citing Wulf Schwarzwaeller, The Unknown Hitler (Bethesda, Md.: Berkeley Books, 1990), p 197.

Less than a century later: “Neoconservatives have turned the Republican Party into a Brownshirt Party,” says Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D., “The Party of Brownshirts” (16 April 2007). One example is their same hostile policy as Hitler's against the inheritance tax, which conservatives derogatorily label as a death tax.
No doubt, as America welcomed Nazis after the war. See, e.g., Eric Lichtblau, “The Nazis Next Door: How America Became a Safe Haven for Hitler’s Men” (2014). The book describes this chapter of "America's national intelligence history and how the CIA, the FBI, and the military all put former Nazi officials to work as spies, intelligence assets, and scientists and engineers after World War II."

Hitler followed the wishes of his voters. Hitler was no different than any U.S. President following the laws enacted by Congress, following public opinion. There was no magic.

Indeed, some "methods [of the 'Final Solution'] were inspired by the U.S. government's subjugation of the American Indian."—John Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, frontispiece. Hitler "admired the [U.S. approach] for the Indians in the Wild West; and often praised to his inner circle the efficiency of America's extermination—by starvation and uneven combat—of the [Indians]," Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, p 802.

America at Columbus' time in 1492 had had 150,000,000 natives, “cent cinquante millions d'hommes,” says Dr. Hippolyte A. Depierris, Physiologie Sociale (Paris: Dentu, 1876), p 25. Another source says 100 million, see George Monbiot, Review of Avatar (The Guardian, 11 January 2010), citing Prof. David E. Stannard, American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World (Oxford Univ. Press, 1992) (Excerpts). See also his video lecture "American Holocaust: The Destruction of America's Native Peoples" (Vanderbilt Univ., 30 Oct 2008).
By the 1890's, only about 250,000 Indians survived, says Richard Thornton, American Indian Holocaust and Survival (1987), and Richard Maybury, "The Indian Wars" (2006), citing Stannard, American Holocaust, supra, p. 146.
For example, the genocide of the Indians on just one Island, Hispaniola, "was the equivalent of more than fifty Hiroshimas,"
says Stannard, American Holocaust, supra, in the "Prologue."

The U.S. had used genocide against the Indians! The U.S., under tobacco-lobby dominated politicians, had treated Indians like they'd treated blacks. Remember Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 US 393, 407; 15 L Ed 691, 701 (1857), people with "no rights which [anyone] was bound to respect; and . . . might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit . . . ." Slavery included genocide, killing tens of millions. Killing Indians, expanding slavery, taking others' land and property, both were standard U.S. polices, for American "Lebensraum," expansion, "Manifest Destiny."

Hitler called German's "Manifest Destiny" Lebensraum. As a matter of perspective, recall from your grade school classes that America's lebensraum policy, "Manifest Destiny," had violently expanded the US from a sliver of 13 colonies along the Atlantic, to continent-wide! over the dead bodies of, e.g., Indians, blacks, and Mexicans.
Note that "it was America that amassed a history of xenophopbia and genocide that impressed even Adolf Hitler. [With Columbus' 1492 arrival] 150 years later nearly 90% of those Native Americans were gone, mostly due to diseases brought by the white invaders. After 1630, white Americans resorted to more aggressive genocide. Aside from the dozens of major anti-Indian wars sponsored by the U.S. government [remember General Sheridan's 'The only good Indian I ever saw was dead'?], American citizens in general . . . often went out of their way to slaughter Indians. Innocent Indians. Indian women and children asleep at night in their tipis. Even Indians under flags of truce. . . . 'poisoned meat and drink, smallpox-infected blankets, booby-trapped bodies, cannon charged with slugs, dogs unleashed on captives, and the execution of the wounded, women and children. . . . Indian women with children were dispatched with no more compunction than stray dogs. . . . Some white men . . . wrote a disgusted . . . missionary . . . "kill Indians just to try their pistols."'"— Prof. Michael P. Ghiglieri, Ph.D., The Dark Side of Man (Reading, MA.: Perseus Books, 1999), p 213.

"The U.S. Cavalry in the late nineteenth century was primarily a government instrument of genocide. As directed by Washington, D.C., it nearly extirpated all Plains Indians . . . By 1864, for example, General Philip Sheridan voiced U.S. policy this way: 'The only good Indian I ever saw was dead.' This was reworded to become the maxim of the U.S. Army: "The only good Indian is a dead Indian.' A more concise formula for genocide would be hard to find," p 162.

Poisoning has a long record of being used against one's enemies. For example, in 1623, British negotiators of a treaty with Indians near the Potomac River, under Chief Chiskiack, offered a toast "symbolizing eternal friendship." The British poisoned the Indians' food. The Indians (chief, family, advisers, and two hundred in the retinue), then died immediately of poisoning!—J. Leitch Wright, Jr., The Only Land They Knew (New York: Free Press, 1981), p 78.
Poisoning by the Spanish conquistadores is reported to have killed tens of millions of Indians in the 1500's, via smallpox, "anthrax, brucellosis, leptospirosis, trichinosis, and tuberculosis."—Charles C. Mann, "1491," 289 Atlantic Monthly (#3) 41-53, at 46 (March 2002).

So can better be expected of smokers? people being killed, and others around them, en masse, as a matter of daily practice! with protective civil laws, and anti-murder laws, being suspended or ignored en masse, just as in Germany!

We have seen that Germany was a land of smokers, Lander, p 308. The result of such wide-spread smoking was known too: “que l'Allemagne, par exemple, serait jamais devenue, dans moins d'un siècle, le peuple le plus immoral et le plus dégradé de l'Europe”—Dr. Hippolyte A. Dépierris, Physiologie Sociale: Le Tabac (Paris: Dentu, 1876), p 367. (Germans had become, within under a century, the most immoral and degraded people in Europe.)

Dr. George W. Jacoby, 50 New York Med J 172-174 (17 Aug 1889), said of carbon monoxide in tobacco smoke, it is a "gas . . . acting as a direct poison upon the brain and medulla oblongata. The walls of the vessels also lose their tonus, become dilated, and rupture easily. Autopsies have revealed large foci of softening in the brain, hæmorrhages into the meninges, and capillary apoplexies in the brain substance."

In this context of known multiple typical brain damage symptoms of smokers, nonetheless, tobacco smoking was widespread in Germany then, Germans became “le plus immoral et le plus dégradé” [the most immoral, degraded people], so Hitler naturally was started into beginning smoking young.

What do you expect brain-damaged people to do? Act normal at all times?

This allowing of little Adolf, like children en masse were being allowed, to smoke, occurred despite the fact it was already known in 1889 (the year he was born), that smoking was especially harmful to youths. Data on tobacco's dangerousness, severe brain damaging effects and role in crime was already then known—among educated people. See also birth-defects data. Read these referenced sites before continuing.

"Partem aliquam recte intelligere nemo potest, antequam totum, iterum atque iterum, periegerit."No one can rightly understand any part until he has read the whole again and again.
Meaning: Re-read these sites, and the references, and this one, "again and again" until you understand them in full.
Do like Eric A. Johnson. Take a decade, 10 years, to do this reading, studying, full-time.

Memory impairment, memory loss, aka Alzheimer's, is disproportionate among smokers. Hitler had such symptoms. "Hitler seemed quite absent-minded and several times asked the same question almost as if a needle was stuck on a record. 'Where are you from, Doctor? Oh yes, Krefeld, Krefeld, yes, Krefeld . . .' Others noted this occasional absent-mindedness, and his growing shortness of temper."—Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, p 850.

"Malnutrition tied to anti-social behavior," says Robert Priedt, HealthDay, The Detroit News, 24 November 2004, p 8H. "Children who are malnourished in their first few years of life are more likely to be aggressive and anti-social throughout children and into their early teens." Source: American Journal of Psychiatry (November 2004). "Researchers found that malnourished children showed 41 percent greater aggression at age 8 than properly nourished children, 10 percent greater aggression and delinquency at age 11, and 51 percent greater violent and anti-social behavior at age 17."

Smoker brain damage has long been well established, since at least the year 1603! Symptoms include impairment of the ability to reason correctly!

The bottom line is that Hitler was correctly deemed “an hysteric bordering on schizophrenia,” aspects disproportionate among smokers, and not uncommon to criminals, suicides, murder victims. Hitler engaged in crimes and eventually became a suicide case, or was murdered. Medical research has long reported (since the 1850's) both a smoking-crime link and a smoking-suicide link. Wherefore psychiatrist Walter Langer goes into great detail on Hitler's symptoms.

Says Dr. Langer, Hitler was deemed “an hysteric bordering on schizophrenia." That is an aspect known in 1922 as not uncommon to smokers. Indeed, by 1876, it was already known that: "Avant le . . . tabac, la folie était une maladie très rare dans l'humanité"—Dr. Hippolyte Dépierris, Physiologie Sociale: supra, p 346. Before tobacco, mental disorder was a rare malady among humans. Hitler's mental disorder and symptoms are a matter of record! They are typical of smokers, not non-smokers.

For Hitler, “killing became a habit. . . . The mass killer who kills quietly and calmly, without batting an eye, and without showing the slightest emotion, is a phenomenon of our [tobacco-using] times, and is likely to be repeated. The instruments of mass destruction are at hand, waiting to be used. . . . The psychopath in a position of supreme power is almost a common-place.”—Robert Payne, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (New York: Praeger Pub, 1975), p xi.

Everyone in the criminal justice system (judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, police, jailers) knows the cigarettes-crime link. They see it every day. People in the system, not just doctors, have written narratives citing the fact. Prison officials were noting the fact pre-1836! The cigarettes-crime link has been repeatedly cited thereafter, including in court precedents.

Doctors have thoroughly researched the subject, ascertaining why cigarettes lead to crime, and found the explanation in the 1830's era. The explanation relates to cigarettes' massive quantities of toxic chemicals leading to brain damage impairing ethical and impulse controls. Doctors have been reporting for over a century that cigarettes' toxic chemicals cause brain damage.

In America, data on smoking and brain damage was a matter of common knowledge, even among American school children, with records of this fact circulated in 1889 by the Michigan House of Representatives, and 1914 by Thomas Edison. American children were so well educated (compared to nowadays) on science, that they could understand Edison's statement! (Nowadays, adults can't! That's how the modern 'Hitler was a non-smoker' myth can get credibility, our educational system and knowledge of science and history have horribly deteriorated.)

Let's emphasize what was then known. Tobacco dangerousness was already long known, addiction, centuries known. The cigarette-crime link was reported by the Michigan House of Representatives in 1889.

Tennessee banned cigarettes in 1897. Michigan by law (MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216) banned cigarette manufacture and sales in 1909. Nebraska banned adulterated tobacco by law, No. 28-1421, in 1919. That year, 1919, was the year Hitler later claimed he quit smoking!

Notwithstanding the grave danger of smoking, Hitler (1889-1945) had already by then (1919) long been a smoker (expelled from school in 1897 for smoking!). He had already by 1919 smoked for 22 years, having started young. His behavior shows typical smoking effects. Other smokers with cigarettes' toxic chemicals kill babies by SIDS, nonsmokers by poison gassing with cigarettes' emissions resulting in lung diseases, lung cancer and heart disease.

Hitler could kill more people than other smokers due to his holding governmental office. He could hire additional smokers as killers, e.g., Adolf Eichman. But it must be remembered, killings of nonsmokers by smokers occur on a daily, hourly basis (co-workers, spouses, the unborn, new-borns, etc.). The difference is only one of scale and media publicity.

Hitler's death camps used cigarettes' major toxic chemicals, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide (the Nazis called the latter Zyklon-B) to kill. See Robert J. Lifton's The Nazi Doctors (N.Y.: Harper-Collins Publishers, 1986), pp 32, 71-72, 143, 157-162, 170, 290, 405, 453-454, 462 and 493 Those two ingredients are really good killing poisons. They really run up the body count! Carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide kill so well the Nazis were prosecuted, The Nurnberg Trial, 6 FRD 69 (1946).

Of course, the Nazis were not as efficient killers as cigarette pushers. Tobacco pushers were long ago pushing towards 37 million killings, whereas the Nazis using the same ingredients got interrupted after a mere six (6) million or so killings!
Note the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), book entitled Research on Smoking Behavior, Research Monograph 17, Publication ADM 78-581, p v (December 1977), said:

A few years earlier, the Royal College of Physicians of London, in its book, Smoking and Health Now (London: Pitman Medical and Scientific Publishing Co, 1971), p 9, had already declared the smoking-caused death toll to be a "holocaust" due to the then "annual death toll of some 27,500." If 27,500 deaths is a "holocaust," and it is, 37 million is (in contrast to Hitler's six million holocaust), a six fold+ holocaust. That is above the World War II "crimes against humanity" level for which prosecutions occurred.

This is not new information! Already by 1836, it had already been well-established "that thousands and tens of thousands die of diseases of the lungs generally brought on by tobacco smoking. . . . How is it possible to be otherwise? Tobacco is a poison. A man will die of an infusion of tobacco as of a shot through the head." —Samuel Green, New England Almanack and Farmer's Friend (1836).

In Nazi Germany, the "threshold limit values" were never enforced at the death camps against cigarette chemicals, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide. Hitler allowed mass sales of tobacco in Germany, in essence, a tobacco pusher!

"If [Hitler did] poison [concentration camp inmates with cigarette chemicals] a little bit each day it's called murder; if [a cigarette pusher] poisons you a little each day it's called a Threshold Limit Value." Revising James P. Keogh, M.D., as cited by Prof. Robert N. Proctor, Cancer Wars: How Politics Shapes What We Know and Don't Know About Cancer (New York: Basic Books, 1995), p 153.

Hitler's father died of a typical smoker lung condition (lung hemmorhage). The cigarette-lung cancer link was known in that era. Was his mother also a smoker? "Maternal prenatal smoking predicts persistent criminal outcome in male offspring." See Brennan, et al., 56 Arch Gen Psychiatry 215-219 (March 1999). (This significant fact—doctors once again pointing out a facet of the cigarettes-crime link—received scant media attention.) But from a medical point of view, this should not be overlooked. See also our site on smoking and birth defects including an increased criminal propensity.

Hitler was a smoker. Calling him a "non-smoker" because he allegedly stopped smoking, a stopping that did not occur until after nearly three decades of smoking, is fraud. Honest people understand that identification of nonsmokers and smokers must be precisely and correctly done. One cannot honestly identify a multi-decade long-term smoker, who eventually, belatedly (too late to prevent tobacco-caused damage) allegedly quits, as a "lifelong nonsmoker." The brain damage has already been done.

Awareness of this what-should-be-obvious fact was extant as long ago as 1960, by Paul S. Larson, Ph.D., H. B. Haag, M.D., and Herbert Silvette, Ph.D., "Measurement of Tobacco Smoking," 88 Medical Times (#4) 417-429 (April 1960) (significantly, that was a study "[s]upported by a grant from the Tobacco Industry Research Committee").

See also E. Bachinger and M. McKee, "Tobacco policies in Austria during the Third Reich," in The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (Vol 11 # 9), pp. 1033-1037 (September 2007). "Nazi authorities in Austria made almost no attempt to discourage smoking and the Austrian tobacco company worked closely with the Nazi authorities to ensure that supplies were maintained. . . . Especially when looked at in the Austrian context, the much-cited link between anti-smoking policies and Nazism is a gross over-simplification." Even almost a century later,
"Smokers' paradise Austria struggles to stub out habit " (26 Sepember 2014): "Even diehard smokers, when arriving in Austria, are in for a shock at the clouds of blue haze filling bars and restaurants, long after the rest of western and central Europe stubbed out puffing in public places. . . . Even Vienna's General Hospital has a 'Tabak' selling cigarettes right in the entrance."

Hitler himself referred to himself in ex-smoker terms! This is admitted in widely circulated public domain material, e.g., Time Magazine (3 May 1999), p 16. So people referring to Hitler as a nonsmoker are liars!

"In essence, the prosecutors took the line that Streicher's incendiary speeches and articles made him an accessory to murder, and therefore as culpable as those who actually ordered the mass extermination of Jews," says wikipedia. "“...For his 25 years of speaking, writing and preaching hatred of the Jews, Streicher was widely known as ‘Jew-Baiter Number One.’ In his speeches and articles, week after week, month after month, he infected the German mind with the virus of anti-Semitism, and incited the German people to active persecution... Streicher's incitement to murder and extermination at the time when Jews in the East were being killed under the most horrible conditions clearly constitutes persecution on political and racial grounds in connection with war crimes, as defined by the Charter, and constitutes a crime against humanity.” The NurnbergTrial, 6 FRD 69 (1946).
Words do indeed constitute "accessory" to murder.

Meaning of These Facts

Germany was "the very land of smokers!" The three German Kaisers (Wilhelm I [1871-1888], Frederick II [1888], Wihelm II [1888-1918]) were smokers.

Wilhelm II (1888-1918) is more famous as he was Germany's Kaiser during the 1914-1918 World War.

For a related example of blind obedience of troops, see the statement by Kaiser Wilhelm II “to a company of young recruits: 'If your Emperor commands you to do so you must fire on your father and mother,'” quoted by Barbara W. Tuchman, The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World Before the War: 1890-1914 (New York: Macmillan Co, 1962), p 240. This followed the Martin Luther grace precedent.

After decades of observations, Tolstoy had warned against having smokers as leaders: "The brain becomes numbed by the nicotine." What Tolstoy called "conscience" thus expires, as impulse control is impaired (abulia, anomie, psychopathy). Tolstoy cited an example, a smoker who began assaulting an aged woman with a knife, wounding her badly. He then shrank from killing her, but after smoking two cigars, dazing his brain, he then completed the knife-murder.—Count Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910), Why Do People Intoxicate Themselves? (10 June 1890), p 10, reprinted in Vicious Pleasures (London: Mathieson, 1896), pp 36-91 ("Alcohol and tobacco") [Excerpt].

Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, 5th ed (Scott, Foresman & Co, 1976), p 10, by James C. Coleman, Ph.D. (summarizes pertinent 1960 data thus: "individuals with psychopathic personality makeup, who tend to exploit power for selfish purposes and have little concern for ethical values or social progress, often become leaders"); and

For more data on residual effects, see the book Residual Effects of Abused Drugs on Behavior, Dept of Health and Human Services; Public Health Service; Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration; National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) Research Monograph Series, Volume 101 (Publication No. ADM 91-1719, Dec 1990):

Page vii expresses concern about "the residual central nervous system and behavioral effects following drug discontinuation . . . the extent to which long-term drug use specifically impairs cognition, e.g., the ability to think and reason . . . . The ramification of residual drug effects extends beyond the individual to include the family, various legal and educational institutions, and even newborn infants."

P. 1 references "a behavioral, cognitive impairment in the initiation and flexibility of thinking and reasoning, a loss in memory function, or both. . . . These longer lasting, persistent impairments in behavior extending beyond any detoxification period have been termed 'residual effects.'"

One effect of electing or appointing a smoker to office, is that a smoker surrounds himself with additional smokers, people whose reasoning is as impaired as his. Hitler surrounded himself with smokers such as Jodl, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Eichmann, etc. (with similarly impaired impulse and ethical controls) willing to do killings up to the limit of their ability.

How could Hitler and associates kill so many? Yes, they were brain-damaged smokers. Yes, Germans by 1876 were already, due to rampant tobacco-use, the most immoral and degraded people in Europe. But that is only part of the explanation.

Notice the missing part of the explanation, facts you won't be learning elsewhere.

You've heard of "libertarianism"? The view that government should not have "prohibitionist" laws that libertarians don't like. And especially no laws against what "consenting" adults might do, like take brain-damaging drugs like tobacco. (Libertarians, it must be said, may disagree on which laws they don't like; but generally laws against mind-altering drugs like tobacco, they tend to oppose, and want to repeal.) Libertarians believe that people can legitimately, should be allowed to (should not be stopped) use brain-damaging drugs such as tobacco, causing permanent and irreversible derangement in themselves. Once insane as a result, such people then disproportionately commit crimes, slaughter others (aka murder or genocide).

Pursuant to this Libertarian dogma in Germany, little Hitler saw adults smoke, followed their example, became a smoker, then as a natural and probable consequence, insane. As an adult, long-time smoker Hitler surrounded himself with smokers in government. Smokers kill other people up to the limit of their ability. That is what happened in the Holocaust -- a direct outcome of the Libertarian pro-tobacco pro-drugs viewpoint. Letting causes produce their natural and probable consequences effects, then wanting to 'punish' the perpetrators: that's the 'libertarian' way, and leads to millions of killings needing 'punishing.'

Here is one result, a smoker-dominated government, people with law-repealing propensities up to the limit of their ability, in this case, repealing laws against killing the handicapped, minorities, foreigners, Jews! Such laws were considered too 'prohibitionist,' too restrictive of people's "freedom" to do whatever they like, like killing other people!

That was these libertarian Nazi / smokers' view. They "liberated" German from "prohibitionist" laws—laws prohibiting fraud, assault, battery, kidnapping, extortion, murder—nasty "prohibitionist" laws like those, laws 'too restrictive of personal liberties'! The Hitler smoker gang liberated the nation from such laws. Maximum libertarianism! to the max!

Repeat, large numbers of Germans liked to massacre Jews. They were NOT forced. Hitler didn't "make" Germans do what they didn't want to do. "No man can struggle with advantage against the spirit of his age and country, and however powerful a man may be, it is hard for him to make his contemporaries share feelings and ideas which run counter to the general run of their hopes and desires," says Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, cited by Prof. Daniel J. Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust
(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996), p vii. Libertarian Hitler in a Lutheran-Catholic nation that already hated Jews, wanted them gone, had gotten rid of many Jews in medieval times, he (Hitler) didn't have to, could not, "make" them do the Holocaust. They wanted to do it, ALREADY wanted to do it BEFORE he was inaugurated in office, as a result of their having already previously voted for him and his libertarian policies. Herr Hitler simply enabled them, as an enabler. Don't believe the lying progaganda that one person!!!! no less, MADE millions of people do what they didn't want to do!!

When Germans elected Hitler, they pooh-poohed

the notion that libertarianism repealing 'prohibitionist' laws could lead to mass death, and

Eichman, too, was a typical smoker. He was "[p]ronounced to be 'normal' by half a dozen psychiatrists."—Eric A. Johnson, Nazi Terror, supra, p 68. Of course, once it is assumed that being a smoker is "normal," their behavior, including mass killings, is then deemed "normal." Of course, smokers kill people, it's normal—killing spouses, children, babies, the unborn, co-workers, strangers, up to whatever the limit of their ability. Smoker killings are normal. In law, the term is "natural and probable consequences."

"The trouble with Eichman was precisely that so many were like him [smokers deemed "normal" by persons unfamiliar with smoker-brain damage and criminal propensities data] . . . terribly and terrifyingly normal. . . . this normality was much more terrifying than all the atrocities put together, for it implied that this new [smoker] type of criminal, who is in actual fact hostis generis humani [or, "dépossédés du sens humain"], commits his crimes under [abulic] circumstances that make it well-nigh impossible for him to know or feel that he is doing wrong."—Hannah Arendt, Eichman in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (New York: 1963 and 1994), pp 25 and 276.

For smokers to not know that they are doing wrong, is normal! for them. This anosognostic characteristic of theirs is ancient data!

A smoker is unable “to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct,” nor “to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law [such as anti-murder law].” Reference People v Matulonis, 115 Mich App 263; 320 NW2d 238 (1982) (a case on physical deterioration of the brain due to typicalsmoker traits caused by brain damage, in context of determining if the person is insane within the meaning of the law (for criminal responsibility purposes).

No laws or orders exist requiring people to kill others via the tobacco poisoning process. Likewise, no laws or orders existed in Nazi Germany requiring people to kill others via the Holocaust. For background on this, please (if you have not already) see
Prof. Daniel J. Goldhagen,
Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996), and Excerpt. In fact, Germans volunteered to kill Jews, just as people now volunteer to raise, manufacture, distribute, and sell tobacco to kill smokers and nonsmokers. “It was the Germans’ volunteerism, expressed in so many different ways, which made them so deadly and which produced this . . . evaluation of them: ‘Their record is fatal because, above and beyond the [alleged] orders, they individually and voluntarily, actively and tacitly, endorsed, enjoyed and enlarged the official program [of extermination].’” Goldhagen, p 395.

In essence, everyone was delegated, like tobacco pushing, to be 'executioner' (of Jews or any disfavored group members). Liberated to kill. No more nasty prohibitionist governmental restraints!

Such killings occur without prior 'due process of law.' Even the same killing gases (carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide) are used.

Another myth to refute, is the myth that Hitler, almost by magic, ceased his functioning. How? By suicide!
The myth of Hitler's suicide is an example of magical thinking. The Allies wanted him out, so he magically committed suicide. How convenient!
No, the real truth is more mundane. There was never medical evidence verifying the suicide myth! only self-serving contradictory allegations! See Prof. W. Hugh Thomas, M.D., The Murder of Adolf Hitler (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995).
In fact, claims of Hitler's "suicide" are so absurd, as to not warrant being responded to respectfully.
"I treat the subject lightly because to a [trained analyst] it [the suicide claim] is so totally ridiculous as hardly to warrant being taken seriously. To treat such testimonies [claims] with anything else than the ridicule they deserve does not serve, and indeed has not served, historical truth. . . . The whole story . . . is totally farcical."—Thomas, Murder, supra, p 112.
The "farcical" claims were that Hitler poisoned himself, or shot himself, disregarding autopsy evidence of no bullet wound, no poison, in the body! The claims had been pure inventions, fabrications, unverified, contrary to the actual objective evidence! Of course, pathologist Dr. Thomas found them "farcical."
The fabrications were made up as the "witnesses" went along, even changing their own stories! Incredible!
Another way of dismissing false claims is with words such as these, "It is not worthwhile to engage in a direct refutation of such a viewpoint, since it consumes time which could otherwise be more usefully employed," says
Walter Rodney, Ph.D., How EuropeUnderdeveloped [Exploited]Africa (London: Bogle-L'Ouverture Publications, 1972; Howard University Press, 1974, 1981, 1982), § 2.2 (a.)

Tragically, due to the malicious, murderous, "tobacco taboo"
(censorship of tobacco-caused news such as of smoker mental disorder symptoms, e.g., abulia), neither Malkin, Stein, Arendt, Johnson, nor Goldhagen recognize that what they are citing is smoker symptoms. Try as they did, they simply lacked the basic grade-school educational skills and knowledge to recognize, to understand, the symptoms that they were observing.
Education had been horribly "dumbed down" since the high level of the 1890's.
Back a century ago, grade school children were taught more about tobacco brain effects than now even Ph.D.s typically know! These authors, aincerely attempting to understand smoker Hitler and Germany, lacked, through no fault of their own, the basic grade-school level subject-matter knowledge to be able to do so on this point.
This site, relying on their otherwise excellent data, helps you, the reader, to understand more deeply.

In no nation is there a law 'requiring' evil, slavery, murder, tobacco planting, raising, manufacture, distribution, selling. However, there are sometimes 'enabling acts,' laws or court settlements pre-empting local authorities from enforcing the right to life.
Nazis passed an enabling act, 'authorizing' genocide, but they overlooked the 1923 Treaty. For such legislators to overlook a higher law, did lead to their being executed. Reichstag President Hermann Goering was sentenced to be hanged, for having done an overt act, the signing (in his capacity as presiding officer of the legislature, the Reichstag) of the 1933 'enabling act.'
Similarly, tobacco lobbyists oft obtain from compliant legislators, an 'enabling act' or 'pre-emption' law forbidding local authorities (or employers) to protect people, just as the Nazis had done. Such enablings/pre-emptions delegate to anyone (typically tobacco pushers and smokers) to be 'executioner' without due process of law, and so of course are unconstitutional as per pure-air-site references. Those law signers too, congressmen, legislators like Goering, as the Nurnberg precedent shows, can subsequently be prosecuted, and ordered hanged for their criminal words and actions, such as voting for or signing an "enabling" / pre-emption act or law.
U.S. Supreme Court cases against unconstitutional delegations of authority include

Those who are educated on the subject of mental disorder, even now, can 'diagnose' Hitler as mentally ill, by watching old newsreels of the man and his body language. For example, his body movement, specifically, hand gestures are typical of mental disorder—too high up, approaching his own face. Normal gestures are lower.

Remember, Hitler was a smoker, expelled from school at age 8 for smoking. His behavior shows typical effects of smoking, abulia—loss of willpower and self-control; delusional reasoning; murderous; pornography lover; perverted; suicidal; all in all, severe brain disease.

Re the "sweeping political success on the part of a private 'unperson' [Hitler] would be explicable only if one assumed extremely pathological motives, not only in Hitler himself, but in the collective psyche of the Germans of his day [era]," says Lothar Machtan, Ph.D., The Hidden Hitler (New York: Perseus Basic Books, 2001) (Review 1, 2, 3, 4). Of course, as Germany was "the very land of smokers" -- psychopaths!

Please read the World War II Secret U.S. Report on Hitler, by Dr. William Langer. It is thorough, and lists a number of symptoms, along with historical context, that can help people understand what goes on in the mind of a smoker who gets power.
(Ed. Note: For Dr. Stuart Stein's 1998 background paper on Dr. Langer's book, click here.)

Another fact to note is that in that era, it was known that "syphilitics are forbidden to smoke" because "'the localization of the toxic action of nicotine is much like that of syphilis'," that is, upon the nerves and blood-vessels," John Harvey Kellogg, M.D., LL.D., F.A.C.S., Tobaccoism or How Tobacco Kills (Battle Creek, MI: The Modern Medicine Publishing Co, 1922 and 1923), p 41 and p 77, respectively. One could add that due to the similar brain damage effects of both tobacco and syphilis, this is obvious advice. Hitler had syphilis. (As a smoker, his ethical and impulse controls became impaired, thus his behavior became more deviant, including sexually, leading to that effect, among others).

Hitler is yet another example of “how disease . . . has frequently changed the course of civilization.” See the concept cited by Frederick F. Cartwright (medical historian) and Michael D. Biddiss (history professor, Cambridge), Disease and History (New York: Dorset Press, 1972). And in turn, see also Howard N. Simpson, Invisible Armies: The Impact of Disease on American History (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1980).

The data rebuts those who allege that Hitler was "anti-tobacco." Yes, in the same way a Jesse Helms would be!! Helms had surgery for tobaco-induced heart disease, a quadruple bypass. But he is still pro-tobacco for everybody else! For us, his attitude is, 'Die, sucka!!' He is solely interested in protecting his own health, yours—is to spit on!

Admittedly, almost everybody—even the tobacco lobby—says it's ok to occasionally talk about tobacco!! That was about all the Nazis did! Nothing meaningful like the Tennessee or Michigan cigarette bans occurred. They didn't do the basic step No. 1, to get rid of the product, get rid of it. Don't just talk about it!! And do half-measures.

Remember, in 1885, just before Hitler was born, it was known that Germany was "the very land of smokers!" as stated in the book by Meta Lander, The Tobacco Problem, 6th ed., supra, p 308. People of that era wouldn't be suckered by a scam claim of him being 'anti-smoking'!

Smoking in fact increased in Germany after Hitler became Chancellor!! during half his term, the first six years (1933-1939, before the War (1939-1945). The tobacco lobby emphasized that it was an early and ardent supporter of his. Under Hitler, "the Nazis continued to supply tobacco to their troops."—David Spitz, "History," Time Magazine, 3 May 1999, p 16. Hitler thus cannot be called "anti-tobacco."

But pretending it for the sake of discussion, arguendo, let's suppose it! If Hitler was "anti-tobacco," it would only be because his own doctor told him it was hurting him personally (like Jesse Helms). Hitler was lazy, he didn't study, so he wouldn't have known a thing about it more than any half-educated layman! (American children knew more on the subject, with large numbers having been given a copy of Edison's 1914 letter.) So any "concern" by him while in office, would not be anything meaningful except—staff suggested it. Like the president, governors, or other officials, if there was something issued, he simply signed whatever the staff handed him. (Hitler signed over 10,000 offical documents during the short time he was in office. Obviously, he did not write them all! That's what staff does.)

German doctors were of course well aware of tobacco diseases, they were already then long known. (Oops, there goes another deliberate lying myth, the one that German doctors under Hitler discovered the cigarette-cancer link!! No they didn't, the cigarette-cancer link was known long before!!). So once something was on paper announced as health policy, minimal as it was compared to Tennessee's and Michigan's laws, it could be carried out, even with Hitler's approval being merely pro forma, merely signing something somebody else wrote. He was lazy and sickly, deteriorating while in office, and only worked a partial day while in office.

When people say "Hitler was anti-tobacco," the correct answer is to laugh and say, "So's Jesse Helms, ha ha! The joke's on you, sucka!"

Smoker Hitler followed U.S. Bible-Belt/Confederate untermenschen doctrine (from the slavery era) that some people have "no rights" worth respecting. Slavers, predominantly in tobacco, had declared slaves (blacks) to have "no rights"; Hitler followed slaver doctrine, and said Jews, Slavs, and other disfavored groups have "no rights."
Pro-slavery tobacco user Roger Taney, who had said blacks have "no rights," had had the same mental disorder as Hitler (tobacco-caused delusional, hallucinating, and similar mental aberrations) and so likewise had denied that some people have rights, and had written a precedent (the Dred Scott decision) to that effect, one Hitler psychotically followed.
Pro-slavery tobacco user such as Roger Taney held what would be called the creationist or Nazi untermenschen view, i.e., that some people are created untermenschen, subhuman, thus have "no rights" worth respecting. They can be brutalized, robbed, burned, murdered, deported, enslaved, family-separated, anything. They have "no rights" worth respecting. Of course, such a view involves standard smoker 'delusions of grandeur,' as Dr. James L. Tracy cited in 1917.
Hitler was confirmed Roman Catholic at his mother's wish on Whitsunday 1904 in the Linz Cathedral at Linz, one year following the death of his father, says Alan Bullock, Hitler, A Study in Tyranny (Harper & Row, 1962), p. 26. Hitler was still going to confession and communion in 1918, says Konrad Heiden, Der Fuehrer: Hitler's Rise to Power (Houghton Mifflin Co, 1944), p 632.
Hitler also followed medieval Catholic precedents on massacres of Jews. Hitler was a Catholic “in good standing,” saying, “'I am now as before a Catholic, and will always remain so.'”—John Toland, Adolf Hitler (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co, 1976), p 803. And he so remained to the end of his life: “not a single leader of the Third Reich—not even Hitler himself—was ever excommunicated,” says
Sam Harris, M.A., The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (New York: W. W. Norton & Co, 2004), p 105.
Medieval Catholic precedents against Jews went to this extreme: "Attacks and expulsions of Jews were a staple of medieval history, so extensive that by the mid-1500's Christians had forcibly emptied most of western Europe of Jews," says Prof. Daniel J. Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust
(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996), Part I, Chapter 2, p 53.
"Hitler . . . consistently claimed to be Christian in his speeches and writings," says Prof.
MichaelLackey (Morris Sun, July 2009). "Hitler . . . formulated a religious-based politics, which he and many Nazis believed to be based on 'true Christianity,'" says Prof. Lackey. Prof. Lackey's book The Modernist God State: A Literary Study of the Nazis' Christian Reich (Continuum, 22 March 2012). In that book, '[b]y defining Hitler's unique version of Christianity, Lackey has illuminated numerous literary works that allude to Hitler's Christian conception of the political." "Lackey first became interested in his research topic while reading black writers such as James Baldwin and Richard Wright, who claimed that the Holocaust was fueled by the Nazis' Christian conception of the legitimate political order." Prof. Lackey's The Modernist God State (2012) "seeks to overturn the traditional secularization approach to intellectual and political history and to replace it with a fuller understanding of the religious basis of modernist political movements. Lackey demonstrates that Christianity, instead of fading after the Enlightenment, actually increased its power by becoming embedded within the concept of what was considered the legitimate nation state, thus determining the political agendas of prominent political leaders from King Leopold II to Hitler."
"Hitler in turn deftly employed God-talk to describe Germany's calling and destiny. In his very first radio address he declared that 'the National Government would preserve and defend those basic principles on which the nation has been built.' These principles, he said, 'regard Christianity as the foundation of our national morality and the family as the basis of national life.' 'Positive Christianity' was the tag-phrase the party used for its platform and 'Kinder, Küche, Kirche' ('Children, Kitchen, Church') became something of a mantra." -- Fritz Stern, November 2004, cited by Prof. Larry Rasmussen, "The Steep Price of Grace: 100 Years after Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Birth, He Still Has Much to Teach Us" (Sojourners Magazine, February 2006).
"Hitler and the Nazis promoted a Christian nationalism, anti-communism, anti-Semitism, and return to traditional values which most Christians appreciated. The Nazi party platform specifically endorsed 'positive' Christianity. . . . Hitler explicitly appealed to Christianity on a regular basis and this was part of why he was popular. Not every Christian supported the Nazis, of course, but he was most popular with conservative Christians seeking a restoration of traditional values. . . . Adolf Hitler . . . did . . . keep saying that he believed in God, had faith in God, and was convinced that he was doing God's work. . . . Hitler often proclaimed his own Christianity, how much he valued Christianity, how important Christianity was to his life, and even how much he was personally inspired by Jesus - his 'Lord and Savior.'" See "Adolf Hitler, Nazi Germany: Christian Nationalism, Anti-Semitism."
"Across both theological disciplines and common piety, the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) had been eclipsed by the New Testament, the passion of Jesus had supplanted the passion of the People Israel, and the church as the New Israel had superseded “old” Israel as the elect People of God. In short, anti-Judaism in the churches and the universities flowed as a steady current within the broad river of anti-Semitism coursing through German society. . . . In a word, the 'most understanding people' did not take a stand because of their deep-seated Protestant acceptance of state authority in the traditional church-state alliance . . . . Citizenship loyalties and its demands trumped faith community loyalties and belonging to the global Body of Christ. . . . Because they were culturally captive, Protestant churches suffered confusion about true patriotism. Ideologically and institutionally aligned with the state, they were unable to take the measure of civic loyalties and faith community loyalties when these conflicted." -- Rasmussen, supra. [Rasmussen is Reinhold Niebuhr Professor of Social Ethics Emeritus, Union Theological Seminary, New York. See also his book, Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Reality and Resistance (WJK Press, 2005).]
"Nazis . . . expressed their religion through their artwork, mementoes, and symbols. Unmistakably, Christianity served as their religion of their expression. [Nazi] artifacts provide further evidence of Hitler's (and Nazi Germany's) Christianity," says James Walker, "Nazi Artifacts" (13 Nov 2005).
(The site also has a photo of the "Catholic Church (St. Michael's), in Leonding, Austria where Adolf Hitler attended as a boy.") And: "One must not forget that Germany represented the most Christianized country in the world in the 1930s and 40s," says Walker, "Nazi photos" (20 May 1998).
For explanation of how this could be, see background on so-called “Christianity.” For context including modern current parallel events, see, e.g., Paul Mason, "The real Greek parallel with Weimar" (BBC, 26 October 2012) (on the Greek Nazi / Religious Right coalition nactivities including attacking performances of movies or plays they disagree with. That happened in Germany, and is now occurring in Greece: "After the first-night disruption of The Silver Lake in Leipzig this is how its director, Douglas Sirk, described the scene at the theatre: 'The sturmabteilung filled a fairly large part of the theatre and there was a vast crowd of Nazi Party people outside with banners and god knows what, yelling and all the rest of it. But the majority of the public loved the play… And so I thought at first, well, things are going to be tough but perhaps it isn't impossible to overcome…[But] no play, no song, could stop this gruesome trend towards inhumanity.' (quoted in Kurt Weill On Stage, by Foster Hirsch). And this is how the director of Corpus Christi, Laertis Vasiliou, whose play was once again disrupted by far right demonstrators in Athens on Thursday night, described it in a message to me just now: 'We went ahead with the performance, which started with two hours of delay because of the fight outside the theatre between the police against the Christian fundamentalists and the Nazis. It was like hell. The noise from outside was clear inside the theatre during the performance. People were beaten up by Nazis and Christian fanatics.'" (See also "Alarm at Greek police 'collusion' with far-right" (17 October 2012)).

The Holocaust is, additionally, a consequence of "grace" preaching, the doctrine that all God's commandments including "thou shalt not kill" are "done away," and replaced by politician laws. See Martin Luther's "Against the Murderous and Thieving Mob of Peasants" (1525), summary of this doctrine: "under the New Testament, Moses [God's Law] does not count; for there stands our Master, Christ, and subjects us, along with our bodies and our property, to the emperor and the law of this world, when he says, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s' [Luke 20:25]” (paragraph 5). "In Mein Kampf, Hitler listed Martin Luther as one of the greatest reformers," says Jim Walker, "Martin Luther's dirty little book: On the Jews and their lies A precursor to Nazism" (7 August 1996 and 20 November 2005).

Luther's pathological "passion for political autocracy ensured a mindless and provincial political absolutism which reduced the vast majority of the German people to poverty, to a horrible torpor and a demeaning subservience," says
William L. Shirer in The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1959).

And note that as many so-called “Christians" do not believe that “thou shalt not kill" (or any other Bible command or principle) is applicable to tobacco, a holocaust-level killer in tens of millions, they could not consistently have a quarrel with Hitler's few millions. Hitler was following "Christian" precedents cited herein (not to mention prior holocaust-level killings of Indians and slaves).
As killing Indians and slaves in the millions was OK to “Christians," a few more millions more or less could certainly logically pose NO problem to them. “When you head South, you're talking about two things—tobacco farmers and evangelicals,” said Ralph Reed. So of course, Hitler remained “in good standing.” (Hitler met the societally accepted definition of "Christian," just say the name, "talk the talk," no need to do any "walk the walk" whatsover; "grace" takes care of that!)
Incidentally, as a side note, but relevant, note that since “Christians” have accepted, condoned, nay, even committed, for centuries' duration, these anti-Indian, anti-slave, anti-smoker holocausts, "Christians" set the stage for a further killing step, abortions. Don't tell the webmaster, 'Christians object to abortion! Not so . . . , their "objection" is carefully limited to the limited extent of certain of their carefully-identified personal pet peeve methods of baby-killings that they purport to object to; the "Christian" objection is not to baby-killings per se. I refer to the century-long medically documented tobacco role in abortions, both first-hand and second-hand. No known "Christian RTL leader" is on record as opposing the use of tobacco to kill the unborn or new-borns, or by fires. [If you disbelieve, check out the "No-Smoking” activist leadership: not a "Christian” clergyman among them! the disdain for "thou shalt not kill” is that prevalent among "Christians"!]
Hitler was no different than the average “Christian.” He was typical, within the norm. “There was . . . nothing unique about Hitler.”—Prof. W. Hugh Thomas, M.D., The Murder of Adolf Hitler (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1995), p 272. And see

German Protestant Theologians Under Hitler, by History Prof. Robert Ericksen (Yale Univ. Press, 1985)

The Crucifixion of the Jews (Macon, Ga.: Mercer Univ. Press, 1986) by Temple Univ. Prof. Franklin H. Littell, citing that Adolf Hitler indeed died a Catholic (with an annual mass celebrated for his memory in Madrid), and Herman Goering died a Lutheran

Theologians Under Hitler: Could It Happen Again?" (Rev. Steve D. Martin: PBS, 2006) (Background; DVD).
For example, Protestant Prof. Gerhard Kittel (a world famous Bible historian), of Tubingen University, taught that ancient anti-Semitism should be turned into action, specificially, barbaric brutality: "We [Germans] must not allow ourselves to be crippled because the whole world screams at us of barbarism," and teaching against concern for world opinion because how Germany "regulates its own cultural affairs does not concern anyone else in the world."
The great "Christian" scholar Paul Althaus spoke of Hitler's rise to power as "a gift and miracle of God" (1933). Another such "Christian," Emanuel Hirsch deemed it a "sunrise of divine goodness."
This gushy clergy policy of defending politicians is sycophantic. Such clergy's world view is this: "we [alleged Christians] have simply to do with the government in fact, and its acting head [politicians] as representing to us, however imperfectly in the civil sphere, the government of Christ. Our subjection [to politicians] takes the form of obeying the [politician] laws, paying taxes, lending our influence on the side of authority," and "Christians were really the greatest friends of order, and it was not only their interest but their recognized duty to occupy no doubtful position toward the Roman state [government]," say Very Rev. H. D. M. Spence, M.A., D.D. and Rev. Joseph S. Exell, M.A., eds., Vol. 22, The Pulpit Commentary, I Peter (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Erdmans Pub Co, 1950), p 122. [Such demonized clergy were likewise sychophantic to wars and to slavery].
In 1543, Martin Luther "wrote that Jews' synagogues should be set on fire, prayerbooks destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes 'smashed and destroyed,' property seized, money confiscated, and that these 'poisonous envenomed worms' be drafted into forced labor or expelled 'for all time,'" says the article "Martin Luther and the Jews." See also Jim Walker, "Martin Luther's dirty little book: On the Jews and their lies: A precursor to Nazism" (7 August 1996 and 20 November 2005).
Luther was "the greatest antisemite of his time, the warner of his people against the Jews," bragged the "leading Protestant clergyman, Bishop Martin Sasse" in 1938, says Prof. Daniel J. Goldhagen, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust
(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1996), p 111. Defending Nazi antisemitism, Bishop Sasse "published a compendium of Martin Luther's antisemitic vitriol shortly after Kristallnacht's [10 November 1938] orgy of anti-Jewish violence. In the forward to the volume, he [Bishop Sasse] applauded the burning of the synagogues and the coincidence of the day: 'On November 10, 1938, on Luther's birthday, the synagogues are burning in Germany,'" supra, p 111. Indeed, "eliminationist antisemitism . . . pervaded the Protestant churches [so] many prominent Church leaders threw their moral weight behind anti-Jewish measures that were still more radical than those of Kristallnacht," supra, p 111.
Remember, Luther was, as his church knew and remembered even hundreds of years later, and bragged, "the greatest antisemite of his time." Martin "Luther's 1543 book, 'Onthe Jewsandtheir lies,' took Jewish hatred to a new level when he [Luther] proposed to set fire to their synagogues and schools, to take away their homes, forbad them to pray or teach, or even to utter God's name. Luther wanted to 'be rid of them' and requested that the government and ministers deal with the problem. He requested pastors and preachers to follow his example of issuing warnings against the Jews. He goes so far as to claim that 'We are at fault in not slaying them' for avenging the death of Jesus Christ. Hitler's Nazi government in the 1930s and 40s fit Luther's desires to a tee," says James Walker, "Martin Luther's dirty little book: 'On the Jews and their lies': A precursor to Nazism" (7 Aug 1996 and 20 Nov 2005).
Luther had also repealed all the Bible Commandments in their entirety. Luther had decreed, “under the New Testament, Moses [God's Law] does not count; for there stands our Master, Christ, and subjects us, along with our bodies and our property, to the emperor and the law of this world, when he says, 'Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s' [Luke 20:25]. Paul, too, speaking in Romans 12 [13:1] to all baptized Christians, says, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities.” And Peter says, “Be subject to every ordinance of man” [I Pet. 2:13]. We are bound to live according to this teaching of Christ, as the Father commands from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, listen to him” [Matt. 17:5].” (Source: Luther's "Against the Murderous and Thieving Mob of Peasants" [1525], paragraph 5). By declaring all the commandments repealed, and the replacement laws as politicians' only, Luther had set the stage for the Holocaust.

"Protestants . . . were in the majority in most of the rest of the country . . . in the main most of the German Protestants were Lutherans and members of the state-sponsored Evangelical Church," says Eric A. Johnson, Nazi Terror: The Gestapo, Jews, and Ordinary Germans (New York: Perseus Basic Books, 1999), p 222.

"It has long been acknowledged by historians that antisemitism, at least in its mildest forms, was present to some extent in almost every social and political stratum of the German Kaiserreich. . . . Olaf Blaschke's recent work on German Catholicism in the Kaiserreich, for example, made the controversial argument that anti-Jewish prejudices were so deeply embedded in the worldview of Catholic laypeople, priests, and political leaders that we should be careful not to draw too sharp a distinction between the attitudes of German Catholics and their Protestant countrymen,"
says Barnet Hartston, "Review of Lars Fischer, The Socialist Response to Antisemitism in Imperial Germany," H-German, H-Net Reviews, November, 2007, citing Olaf Blaschke, Katholizismus und Antisemitismus im Deutschen Kaiserreich (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997).

“Hitler [and Lutheranism] did not spring from a void; the excesses perpetrated by him [i.e., by the populace] were a culmination of a straight, relentless line of persecution that had been going on for centuries, from the time of the Crusades through the First Reich--the Holy Roman Empire--in the Middle Ages to the Second Reich of Bismarck and Kaiser Wilhelm II, when a strong belief in German racial superiority was developed.

“He [Hitler] was the logical heir to the bloodthirsty prophets as well and, like them, he was dynamic and ruthless, possessed by apocalyptic fantasy and completely convinced of his own infallibility. . . . Each of the old prophets felt he had to destroy one great corrupting force. In Hitler's case it was the Jews--an ancient target--and their elimination was only a necessary cleansing which would bring the world to its final glory. . . .

“It was this inherited apocalyptic vision that inspired Hitler to [libertarian-style approve the populace's desire to] massacre millions of Jews. He had no qualms. 'I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator,' he said. 'By defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord,'” says John Toland, The Last 100 Days (New York: Random House, 1965), p 232.
Rev. Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, “The Church of Christ has never lost sight of the thought that the 'chosen' people (the Jews) who nailed the redeemer of the world to the cross, must bear the curse for its action through a long period of suffering. . . . .”
Hitler followed medieval precedents on massacres of Jews. He was a Catholic “in good standing” — “'I am now as before a Catholic, and will always remain so.'”—Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, p 803. And he so remained: “not a single leader of the Third Reich—not even Hitler himself—was ever excommunicated,” says Sam Harris, M.A., The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (New York: W. W. Norton & Co, 2004), p 105.
In the article, “'Crusades': The holy wars proclaimed by the Christians in Western Europe at the end of the 11th cent. with the avowed purpose of wresting the Holy Sepulcher from the hands of the infidel Moslems; the c. marked a turning point in the history of the Jews of Christian Europe. From the prime objective of defeating the infidels in the Holy Land, Christians turned in an outburst of hate against the Jewish 'infidels' in their midst. As early as 1094, Godfrey of Bouillon declared that he would avenge the blood of Jesus on the Jews, leaving none alive. The First Crusade of 1096 brought with it the virtual extermination of the ancient Jewish communities of Speyer, Worms, Mainz [Germany], and others. . . . When the Crusaders finally reached Palestine and stormed Jerusalem (1099) they drove all Jews there into a synagogue and burned them alive. The pattern of anti-Jewish massacres . . . was repeated throughout Europe during subsequent c. (especially the Second and Third [Crusades]).”—Dr. R. J. Zwi Werblowsky and Dr. Geoffrey Wigoder (Hebrew University, Jerusalem), The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), p 103. (Background).
Pope Innocent III in 1215 issued a decree that Jews must different clothing, e.g., a yellow or red badge, or a pointed hat.
"There are anti-Jewish rules in [Thomas] Aquinas's Summa [Theologica] that make [the] Nuremberg laws look mild.”—Herman Wouk, War and Remembrance (Boston: Little Brown and Co, 1978), Part I, Chapter 17, p 168.
“Augustine, ever the ready sectarian, rejoiced at the subjugation of the Jews and took special pleasure in the knowledge that they were doomed to wander the earth bearing witness to the truth of scripture and the salvation of the gentiles. The suffering and servitude of the Jews was proof that Christ had been the messiah after all,” says Sam Harris, End of Faith, supra, p 97.
“Goldhagen also reminds us that not a single 104German Catholic was excommunicated before, during, or after the war, ‘after committing crimes as great as any in human history.’ This is really an extraordinary fact. Throughout this period, the [Roman Catholic] church continued to excommunicate theologians and to proscribe books by the hundreds, and yet not a single perpetrator of genocide—of whom there were countless examples—succeeded in furrowing Pope Pius XII’s censorious brow,” says Sam Harris, End of Faith, supra, p 104.
“When we consider that so few generations had passed since the church left off disemboweling innocent men before the eyes of their families, burning old women alive in public squares, and torturing scholars . . . for merely speculating about the nature of the stars, it is perhaps little wonder that it [the church] failed to think that anything had gone terribly amiss in Germany. . . . Vatican officials . . . helped members of the SS . . . escape . . . in the aftermath of the war,” says Sam Harris, End of Faith, supra, p 105.
During the Middle Ages' Plague, Jews were blamed. Killings of Jews began by “charges originating in Savoy” blaming Jews, and had the support of Emperor Charles IV. The result was that “60 large and 150 small communities were exterminated. . . . This was the greatest disaster which occurred to German Jewry in the Middle Ages.”—Cecil Roth, B. Litt., M.A., D. Phil., and Geoffrey Wigoder, D. Phil., The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia (Jerusalem: Masada Press, 1959-1975), p 319.

In Spain: "After the fall of the Roman Empire, the Jews were favorably treated by the Visigoths so long as the latter followed the Arian form of Christianity, but when they [the Visigoths] embraced Catholicism in 589 [C.E.] there was a reaction. From 612 onward, a relentless persecution took place under the direction of successive [Catholic] Councils of Toledo. . . . Freedom was brought in 711 by the invasion of the Arabs. . . . But with the waning of the Moslem domination, a more intolerant spirit began to spread from N Europe. In the middle of the 13th cent., the Dominican Order in particular initiated constant anti-Jewish propaganda. . . . In 1391, a wave of massacres beginning at Seville swept through the entire Peninsula. . . . After a series of popular outbreaks against them, the Inquisition was introduced in 1478. . . . In 1492, the Jews were . . . expelled from the country by an edict of Ferdinand and Isabella,” p 1786.

"The expulsion from S. was succeeded and completed by those from Portugal (1497) and Navarre (1498)," p 1787.

“Murderous attacks became common after the First Crusade (1096),” p 694. “In 1096 . . . the Crusaders massacred the Jews throughout the Rhineland and the adjacent areas,” p 746.

“The 1298 massacres inspired by a knight named Rindfleisch, those of 1336 led by leather-jerkined fanatics nicknamed Armleder, and especially those of 1348/9 . . . were on the widest possible scale and perpetrated with extreme barbarism; in the last mentioned series, over 350 localities suffered, and over 200 communities were utterly wiped out,” p 746.

“The condition of the Jews further deteriorated under [French King] Louis IX (1226-1270), and in 1306 [under Philip IV], they were brutally expelled,” p 694.

Russian Tsarina Elizabeth (1741-1762) [the head of the Russian Orthodox Church] "decreed the expulsion of the Jews from Russia in 1742," p 614. Two centuries later this anti-semitic attitude was continuing. “Russian Orthodox priests . . . taught . . . that 'Jews were both Christ-killers and dangerous revolutionaries' and [numbers of people became anti-semitic because] they 'believed their priests,'” says Richard Rashke, Escape From Sobibor (1982, 1995),
p 275, referenced by Carl R. Schulkin, Ph.D., in
“Escape From Sobibor: A Personal Review Essay.”

For additional background, see, e.g.,

Christian Roots of Medieval Anti-Semitism, by Andrew Feldman (Antioch College Diss., 1973); and

Religious Violence between Christians and Jews: Medieval Roots, Modern Perspectives, by Anna Sapir Abulafia (Basingstoke, England; New York: Palgrave, 2002).
A medieval example of hatred of Jews relates to the Deuteronomy 23:12-14 command to have a sewer system, to bury, cover, human waste. "Christians" claimed during the Middle Ages, that this Bible command is 'done away.' Plague resulted. Casualties were primarily among Christians, less common among Jews obeying Deuteronomy 23:12-14. 'Christians' were enraged and blamed the hygienic Jews. Killings of Jews began by “charges originating in Savoy” blaming Jews, and had the support of Emperor Charles IV. The result was that "60 large and 150 small communities were exterminated. . . . This was the greatest disaster which occurred to German Jewry in the Middle Ages."—Cecil Roth, B. Litt., M.A., D. Phil. and Geoffrey Wigoder, D. Phil., The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia (Jerusalem: Masada Press, 1959-1975), p 319. (See background.)
Hitler resumed the extermination process of the Catholic Middle Ages. Hitler followed "Christian" precedents, including that of the aforesaid "Godfrey of Bouillon [on] leaving none alive."
Hitler's “Christian” policy was “that the killings should be done as humanely as possible [pursuant to] his conviction that he was observing God's injunction to cleanse the world of vermin. [As a Catholic] he carried within him its teaching that the Jew was the killer of God. The extermination, therefore, could be done . . . as the avenging hand of God—so long as it was done impersonally, without cruelty. Himmler was pleased to murder with mercy. He ordered technical experts to devise gas chambers which would eliminate masses of Jews efficiently and 'humanely'”—Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, p 803.
Himmler smoked "two cigars a day," says Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, p 869. Cigars have long been linked to brain damage.
Himmler was Catholic and had attended Mass regularly. He wrote in his diary: "Come what may, I shall always love God . . . and remain faithful to the Catholic Church." He founded the SS on Jesuit lines, emphasing obedience, visualization, and organization, says James H. Brennan, The Occult Reich (New York: Signet, 1974), pp 114, 129, and 121 respectively. [See also movie of similar name: Nazis: The Occult Conspiracy].
Pope Pius XII described Hitler's anti-Bolshevism as “high-minded gallantry in defense of the foundations of Christian culture,” says Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, p 774. At the time of Hitler's sudden unprovoked attack on, and aggression against, Russia in June 1941, “A number of German bishops, predictably, openly supported the attack. One called it 'a European crusade,' a mission similar to that of the Teutonic knights. He exhorted all Catholics to fight for 'a victory that will allow Europe to breathe freely again and will promise all nations a new future,'” says Toland, Adolf Hitler, supra, p 774. (See Background).
Cardinal Ratzinger is quoted as saying "The Treaty of Versailles was deliberately intended to humiliate Germany and to burden the people with so much debt that it radicalized the people . . ." says Timothy W. Rybeck, "Forgiveness: Joseph Ratzinger and the War," The New Yorker, pp 66-73 at 68 (6 Feb 2006).
In Hungary, Cardinal Mindszenty engaged in "collaboration with the Nazis [and took] part in the deportation of the Jewish population to Hitler's death camps," says George Seldes, Witness to a Century (New York: Ballantine Books, 1987), p 418. Mindszenty believed "the Jews were to blame for all the ills in the world, the Jews had stabbed Germany in the back, the Jews were trying to run the world their way," p 419. ["On February 5, 1974, Pope Paul VI removed Mindszenty from his post as Cardinal-Primate of Hungary," p 422.]
In Yugoslovakia, Cardinal "Stepinac had been the chief chaplain of Hitler's Nazi Army," Seldes, supra, p 433. Stepinac had "Nazi affiliations," and made "newsreel appearances with [them] and their army," Seldes, supra, p 432.
In Spain, during the right-wing coup against the Spanish Republic, "[t]he entire German air force saw service in Spain. Goering's plan was to have each and every squadron get actual war experience in preparation for the world war Hitler was planning the year the Spanish conflict ended," p 345. Thus, for practice, "the Nazi German air services had destroyed [an entire city] Guernica and [had] killed two thousand in one square block in Barcelona, a Goering experiment [in bombing civilians] for the next war," Seldes, supra, p 309.
In the US, to aid and abet this, "Cardinal Daugherty in Philadelphia demanded that he [the U.S. newspaper publisher] stop [reporting here in the U.S.] "the eyewitness accounts of officially ordered atrocities by the German Nazis [and allies] but he [the publisher] refused," Seldes, supra, pp 308-309. "The Cardinal then [retaliated by publicly] calling for a boycott of the [U.S. publisher's U.S.] papers," p 309. "Having failed [with that], the Philadelphia Cardinal went to work on the big advertisers . . . all of whom were immediately intimidated by the word 'boycott,'" p 309. "Cardinal Hayes . . . announced publicly he prayed for a [fascist] victory" in Spain, p 310.
In Slovakia, "Monsignor Tiso was actually set up as a ruler" and "declared war on the United States," Seldes, supra, p 418.
A clergyman arrested by the Gestapo had been "accused of making [remarks] that, in his opinion, too few priests had spoken out against the Nazis. As he sarcastically told the [audience] only 60 of the roughly 25,500 German Catholic priests had cases pending against them at the time, so the rest of the priests, as he ironically put it, were surely 'model citizens,'" says Eric A. Johnson, Nazi Terror: The Gestapo, Jews, and Ordinary Germans (New York: Perseus Basic Books, 1999), p 227.
"The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life." Adolph Hitler, "My New World Order, Proclamation to the German Nation at Berlin," 1 February 1933.
Another example of the religious-right “Christians for Hitler” is Alphonse de Chateaubriand (1877-1951), author of La Gerbe des forces (nouvelle Allemagne) (Paris: B. Grasset, 1937). This “Christian” “made a pilgrimage to Nazi Germany in 1937 and quickly became converted into a fanatical worshiper of Hitler, whom he saw as a Christ-like figure, and into an unblushing admirer of [Nazi] Germany, which he found full of humanism and Christian ideals, wishing only peace with her neighbors. . . .”
"Christian" author Chateaubriand said “Hitler is immensely good. . . . If he salutes the masses with one hand he holds out the other faithfully toward God. . . . The thoughts of Hitler have their roots deep in the profound waters of the Christian sea. Hitler is trying to raise a Christian temple for Germany. . . . The [Nazis] are the beginning of the work of God.”—Quotes from William L. Shirer, The Collapse of the Third Republic (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1959), p 441. (See Background).
Note that "the annihilation of the Jews was actively supported by French and Dutch citizens, Poles, Hungarians, Romanians, Slovaks, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, and Latvians. It is now also well documented that anti-Semitism in the United States and Great Britain prevented both countries from doing as much as they could have to publicize these genocidal policies or to mount a serious rescue campaign," says Prof. John W. Dower, War Without Mercy: Race & Power in the Pacific War (New York: Pantheon Books, 1986), Chapter 1,
p 4, referencing
Theodore S. Hamerow, "The Hidden Holocaust," Commentary, March 1985, pp 32-42, and
David S. Wyman, Ph.D., The Abandonment of the Jews: America and the Holocaust, 1941-1945 (Pantheon Books, 1984) (Review).
Bernard Wasserstein, D.Phil., D.Litt., writes, "During the first two years of the war [1939-1941], when the German authorities bent their efforts to securing the exodus of the Jews from the Reich and from Nazi occupied territory, it was the British Government [under the anti-semite Winston Churchill] which took the lead in barring the escape routes from Europe against Jewish refugees."—Britain and the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945 (London: Clarendon Press, 1979), p 345.
Britain under smoker Winston Churchill obstructed Jews fleeing to safety, aided and abetted the Holocaust. Britain under Churchill, despite knowing the natural and probable consequences, foreseeable genocide, returned Jews seeking to flee Germany during the Holocaust, says Menachem Begin, The Revolt: Story of the Irgun (New York: Schuman, 1951, revised ed., Dell, 1977), p 17, and Chap IV, esp. pp 63-73.
Menachem Begin, later Prime Minister of Israel, quotes a member of Britain's Sixth Airborne:

Prime Minister Begin gives a perspective of what six million killings mean, “more than a third [40%] of all the [16½ million] Jews in the world . . . same [ratio] applied to . . . Great Britain would give a death-roll of some sixteen millions . . . These facts are accepted as platitudinous by many today. Their awful significance is grasped by very few,” p 84.
For overview of The Nuremberg Trial, see, e.g., Robert Shnayerson, "Judgment at Nuremberg," Smithsonian, pp 124-141 (Oct 1996).
For analysis of media role, see David Walsh, “US Prosecuted Nazi Propagandists as War Criminals: The Nuremberg Tribunal and the Role of the Media,” WSWS (16 April 2003).
In contrast to "Christian" behavior, note these references:

The allegations of Hitler as anti-smoking bring to mind the case of the bribed judge, Martin T. Manton. The case is United States v Federal Appeals Judge Martin T. Manton, 107 F2d 834 (CA 2, 1939) cert den 309 US 664; 60 S Ct 590; 84 L Ed 1012 (1940). Over a period of years, and 28 “distinct overt acts,” Judge Manton took $186,000 in bribes. As part of his cover, to make himself look good, he had voted “pro-morality” in obscenity cases, e.g., U.S. v One Book Called Ulysses by James Joyce, 72 F2d 705 (CA 2, 1934). Hitler simply followed that precedent; the story of being pro-morality would serve as a cover story, a diversion off the mass evils.

It is well-established for over a century that most criminals are smokers. Hitler and his continuing criminal enterprise (CCE) gang members were disproportionately smokers, due to the cigarette link to criminal activity, due to the brain damage involved, producing what has been termed psychopathololgy, abulia, or anomie, a significant characteristic of which is significant impairment of ethical and impulse controls. In the US, the Hitler et al CCE would be prosecuted under RICO, 18 USC § 1961 concepts.

Nonsmoking activism, if successful, would have as a "natural and probable consequence," the prevention of creating future psychopaths, future Hitlers. Referring to nonsmoker Nazi-prevention efforts as itself Nazi, is an example of a Hitlerian "big lie" perpetrated to fraudulently conceal the tobacco role in Naziism.

As a side note, it must be noted that some people say that, for example, Pope Pius XII, did not do enough against the Hitler Holocaust. Here is a two-part answer.

1. Note the behind-the-scenes information on activism reported in the book, Hitler and the Vatican: Inside The Secret Archives That Reveal the New Story of the Nazis and the Church by Prof. Peter Godman (Free Press, 2004) [Review].

2. Bear in mind that, prior to Hitler, the tobacco-crime link had long been known; and that dealing with causes is more sincere, than the hand-wringers who whine about effects (or inadequacy of dealing with them). The actual fact is this, some few churches HAD TRIED to prevent the Hitler Holocaust, by trying to prevent the tobacco Holocaust (of which the Hitler Holocaust is only one fraction). Nineteenth-century-and-before prevention-oriented clergymen had cited that cigarette selling is a sin. Such people possessed a mental attitude that is now rare, respect for medical findings.

Recall the book NineteenEighty-Four [1984] by GeorgeOrwell. It cited that the truth of history was falsified, forgotten. Likewise occurs re "Christians" and Hitler. At the time, they obsessively supported him. Now, after the fact, they pretend the opposite, even to the extreme of calling Hitler, retroactively, an atheist. That is not what they said at the time!
NineteenEighty-Four-style, they reverse the facts of history, and conceal them from their gullible members / sheeple.

We can use the slavery analogy. Churches long cited data that slavery is a sin. Catholics did. Protestants did. The fact that average voters, en masse, choose to defy what the clergy advise (especially when doctors are supporting the clergy) is not something to blame the church for. One can lead a horse to water, or a sinner to truth, but cannot make him drink or repent!!

Finger-pointing at people such as Pope Pius XII is a type of blaming the messenger. The messenger brings the message. The people ignore the message. Problems arise. Then people finger-point at the messenger for not knowing how to react to their disregard of the original message!!

Nowadays the average person is quite ill-educated. So if the clergy were to resume preaching against smoking (as some have), the public would not believe them. The public doesn't believe the doctors, the researchers, why on earth would they believe the clergy!! So if some people, even a Pope such as Pius XII, are at a loss to know how to react to such massive public ignorance and apathy, are at a loss to know how to inspire people to cease and desist mass evil, don't point fingers at them. Ask yourself, what have YOU done to educate and inspire people to deal with the current Tobacco Holocaust, of which the above listed effects are sub-parts? If you yourself have done nothing, stop finger-pointing.

Hitler used disinformation to convince voters to support him and the Nazi Party. One myth was the "Dolchstosslegende," the "lie: that Germany did not lose the war on the battlefield, but because of the Dochstoss, or stab-in-the-back, 'by civilians,' 'by the Socialists,' 'by the Communists,' and 'by the Jews.'" German Army war commander Field Marshall Paul von Hindenberg knew this story to be disinformation, but refused to "speak out," says George Seldes, Witness to a Century (New York: Ballantine Books, 1987), pp 99-101. Hindenberg had given an interview immediately after the 11 Nov 1918 Armistice to four reporters including Seldes on the subject, but due to censorship, this interview was not published until after Hitler had attained power. (For more background, see Emmet Crozier, American Reporters on the Western Front [Oxford Univ Press, 1959], pp 273-279.)

An incdent from the Gestapo itself shows awareness that smokers' claims should be treated with skepticism. A smoker accused a priest of being anti-Nazi, but due to his odd behavior, the Gestapo dismissed the case. "The Munich Gestapo reported . . . that he [the smoker accuser] seemed 'very unsteady' and that he was 'a very strong smoker with fingers that were strongly discolored from nicotine,'" says Eric A. Johnson, Nazi Terror: The Gestapo, Jews, and Ordinary Germans (New York: Perseus Basic Books, 1999), p 230.